Freedom as a servant of tyranny

Olavo de Carvalho
Dirio do Comrcio, May 25, 2009
For at least the past forty years, the political debate in Brazil has been reduced to a choice
between free ar!et and state interventionis, identified with the "#i$ht% and the "&eft,%
respectively, and char$ed with autoatically definin$, on that econoic basis, all other
huan alternatives in all fields of culture, le$islation, orality, etc' (hen a person
identifies hiself as a "free)ar!et advocate,% he is iediately classed aon$ ri$htists,
conservatives, and reactionaries, becoin$, on the other hand, a socialist, a pro$ressive,
and a revolutionary as soon as he switches to the field of state interventionis' #oberto
Capos and Celso Furtado, both Brazilian econoists, are the icons of the first and
second factions, respectively'
(hen factors*of a oral, cultural, ilitary, $eopolitical, or any other nature*interfere
in the dispute, coplicatin$ the picture and deprivin$ the honorable public of the
coforts of that priary scheatis, the only reaction the Brazilian ind is capable of is
an attept to +uic!ly retrieve its state of hoeostatic e+uilibriu by proclaiin$ that
&eft and #i$ht no lon$er e,ist, that the world has entered a sta$e of paradisiacal
unaniity, and that, to su up, there is nothin$ left to be discussed, e,cept for the naes
of those who will fill out the offices in the hierarchy of universal peace'
-ransitionin$ thusly fro a silly scheatis to an even sillier one, they believe to have
overcoe all ideolo$ical conflict and risen to the hei$hts of soe sublie pra$atis,
where, with the lower passions already e,tin$uished, techno)scientific reason rei$ns
supree, nothin$ else bein$ iportant but the ob.ective calculation of costs and benefits'
/nfortunately, these are all self)flatterin$ illusions, desi$ned to protect the huan ind
fro a conflict with the painful cople,ities of the real world'
First of all, the choice between free ar!et and state interventionis is one thin$ when
re$arded as a theoretical alternative, or as an abstract odel of an ideal society, and a
copletely different thin$ when placed in a specific historical and $eopolitical conte,t'
-he banner of econoic freedo was first raised a$ainst onarchic despotiss' 0t that
tie, it was identified with the forces of revolution' 0 free)ar!et supporter was closer to
a socialist than to an ultraontane onarchist' &ater on, with the rise of the #ussian and
1eran statist totalitarianiss, free)ar!et advocacy becae "reactionary'% By then,
free)ar!et proponents would tea up with their forer eneies, onarchists and
Christian conservatives, a$ainst the socialist threat' -his second for assued by the
ideolo$ical debate, upon which the usual Brazilian distinction between &eft and #i$ht is
based, has lon$ been absorbed and transcended by a third e+uation' Free ar!et has
becoe the prete,t upon which the $lobalist forces interested in buildin$ a controllin$
and despotic world $overnent have been underinin$ national soverei$nties and
inducin$ entire nations to abdicate all other liberties in e,chan$e for the ere power of
1
buyin$ and sellin$' -he ar$uent that econoic freedo brin$s with it all other
freedos is therein used as an e,cuse to brin$ about the opposite result2 the suppression
of all freedos but one' Concoitantly, those very $lobalist forces have been $ivin$
billionaire support to all leftist and revolutionary or$anizations in the world, in order to
a!e the wor! a$ainst the nation)states, causin$ any supporters of the free ar!et,
who nonetheless fancy theselves as en of the "#i$ht,% to ultiately .oin forces with
the leftist rebellion a$ainst oral and cultural traditionaliss, which, to soe, are
obstacles to the revolution, and to others, are ipedients to the free ar!et' /nited by
their clin$in$ to old stereotypes dislocated fro the present situation, both fail to perceive
that, in their fi$ht a$ainst the nation)state, which soe hate as reactionary, and others as
interventionist, they are only aidin$ the 1reat &eviathan of the world state to rise upon
the ruins of any lesser &eviathans'
-he ideolo$ical conflict is not over' 3t is .ust foridably ore coplicated' -he stru$$le
between freedo and tyranny has ta!en on a new forat, in which the en$ineers of
tyranny, by playin$ with the conventional sybols of political debate, have ana$ed to
enlist to their service even the very supporters of freedo'
-ranslated by 0lessandro Cota'
#evised by 4onald 5an!'
2